MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6986867580

Relationship between person with dementia and adolescents: A preliminary survey of the Association Between Children and Dementia Elders (ABCDE) Project

2020· article· en· W6986867580 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueQST-Repository (National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaAssociation (psychology)Quarter (Canadian coin)CognitionOlder peopleGrandchildGrandparent
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: The aim of this study was to clarify the relationship and psychological reaction of person with dementia and their grandchildren by administering aquestionnaire to the primary caregiver.Methods: A total of 109 caregivers of people with dementia in outpatient enrolled in this study. Questionnaire collected information on age, gender, cognitive severity(Mini-Mental State Examination), clinical diagnosis, relationship of the caregiver, frequency of meeting with grandchildren, and reaction of person with dementia tospending time with their grandchildren and/or great-grandchildren, and vice versa.Results: Eighty-four people had at least one grandchild (77.1%) and a quarter lived with their grandchild and/or great-grandchild. Age of grandchildren increasedwith increasing age of person with dementia; frequency of seeing each other decreased with increasing age. While most people with dementia were reported to lookhappy when spending time with their grandchildren (94.5%), young people tended to be more non-reactive (26.0%). Non-reactive grandchildren were more prevalentin the older dementia age group (p < 0.001). Nevertheless, the majority of grandchildren (74.0%) enjoyed spending time together.Conclusions: People with dementia enjoy spending time with their grandchildren, although older grandchildren are less reactive in these situations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQST-Repository (National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology)Same topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207